Shwa

It's funny though isn't it - that contrast between the public and private. Kind of like the 'publicity' Christmas gets - necessarily banal when it gets to the national - and public - scope. There has always been an undercurrent of triumphalist militarism in the Canadian public perspective. Heck, even our 'peacekeepers' got medals and ceremonies and a certain reverence in public.

Why should we use "private unions" as any sort of baseline for the measurement of anything?

How about this one from the Star in June 2010? Dalton McGuinty, Bill Blair defend quiet boost in arrest powers Boosting the arrest powers by using the Public Works Protection Act and making perfectly legal specifics using ONTARIO REGULATION 233/10 which was revoked as a standing regulation on June 28th, 2010. So now read the story from the Star, above, and then the Globe story you linked. Once you have finished reading the stories answer me this: what "secret" law??

So really, instead of "public services and crown corporations" you are only referring to Canada Post. Because in the list of other Crown Corporations, I am certain that there are different skillsets required. For example, the Royal Canadian Mint. They might have someone walking around and dropping pieces of paper in boxes, but they might also have very technical and specialized skills required to mint money.

Depends on context of course. But they could be used in propaganda for sure. More or less. But even as mere slogans they can be usurped for the needs of the other side. Actually, I don't see to many terms than can't be applied to one or the other. Because they obtained power and can enforce their view. Why bother with democracy? All terms are invented for the 'common good' in the context of who has the power at any particular time. The right is as fond of language as the left. For example...? "Well, first of all, they are major, very profitable, corporations." Fox is News Corp. Look it up. Totally mainstream. It seems most nowadays are consumers of the news, which is both participating and observing. If Stephen Harper can tone it down, anyone can. Yes, the underlying infrastructure are technological trends. But the usage of them - the prevalence in the social sphere, is a sociological trend. It is not so much about what they are using, but what they are saying, which fall under the political and ideological. MSM is perfectly aware of these media and how they can be used to advanced corporate goals. Perhaps, but there is a sensibility that is required I think, to separate the fact from the fiction. Whether than means "all the right things" I am not sure since even some destructive acts can result in new perspectives.

Yeah because every time I go into a bar in Montreal I expect to be murdered; every time I go to drop a letter off in a mailbox I am expecting it to explode. God forbid I visit the PEI Legislature. You know, because of "past deeds." LOFL!

Sure it did. Don't drink and drug and then post. It doesn't improve your abilities. I don't know, have you bothered to look? "like a pup" Drinking and drugging doesn't improve your English comprehension either.

There are no "uneducated, unskilled employees" in essential public services or crown corporations.

So you are saying Mayor Ford's response is one of simple optics?

The thing is Pliny is that "social justice" and "equality" both have their connotations with any given ideology. They are not terms that belong to any particular political bend. The meanings might differ, of course, but the terms don't and can be used by anyone. And let's be clear here, the "right" have used "social justice" and "equality" as justications for imperial or economic expansion as long as they have existed. The one we hear often enough is the spread of "democracy." I think most ideologies - those that can stand - use social engineering to their advantage. Always. Conservatively, monarchies have lasted a long, long time. hasn't it always been that way though? When has caring and sharing NOT permeated society? Even in it's basic forms - and for reasons we might find distasteful now - there was always some form of what we would call noblesse oblige. We are a social animal after all. But that doesn't mean the terms cannot - or have not - been used by the right. They have their own 'brand' of social justice and equality. And my argument is how can they not? We are a social animal, we exist in groups and group dynamics - or social engineering if you will - has been present from the get-go. No man is an island. No, I consider FOX part of the MSM: What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream They operate like any other biggie. The MSM provides their own challenging voices through competition. And they most certainly are not above social trends or they wouldn't have web pages, Facebook accounts of follow-me-on-Twitter. Again, fact without evidence isn't much of a fact. I suppose I could believe, in a kid of faithful way, but even that - over time - loses it's appeal. And I am still faced with the choice as to what makes sense to me and why.

So you do admit that the right wing also makes claims to "social justice and equality." Good. So now you see how both the left and a right have their own claims upon the concept. Thus attributing it to one and not the other is an imprecise observation. Here is a further example of you admitting it. This is a good thing. The relegating of communism and socialism to the extreme left wing was simply a manouver that has given the right an edge in western democracies to pursue social justice and equality in the name of the common good, and point to the left as being uncaring and dictatorial. It makes for good public debate. It seems the right and left have a little more in common than the continuance of the relegation of the have-nots. Tell you what Pliny - show me one single government - from the most simple of tribal organizations to the highest orders of the highest civilizations that has NOT pursued and sort of "social engineering." Anywhere at any time. Let's put this "social engineering" baby to the test. I didn't say "media" I said "MSM" which means mainstream media. And yes, they do. I would have used the Otis Chandler example at the Los Angeles Times, but whatever. However, one of the worse offenders in right wing bias is Fox News and they seem to be doing just fine with their brand of bullshit. The best you can do is nitpick, but you have no evidence of any widespread left-wing bias in the MSM. When you do provide something coherent in that regard, I will gladly review it. No, the point is that money talks. It doesn't really matter where it is coming from. Shoemakers and tailors still - regardless of any ideological bias - follow the trends of society to sell their goods and earn their living. Just like the MSM.

Cite your source now. Thanks.

I provided you plenty of links to "equivalent" and worse. You are still bullshitting and you know it. And now you are just embarassing yourself.

From the Star No thanks, says Mayor Rob Ford At first glance, I thought this story had some to do with clemency, but so. It has more to do with Rob Ford's truly bizarre thinking. Heck, even his supporters are baffled by this.

Sure, I want the AG and Parliament to know what the deal is and that is what the AG reports are for. But the RCMP weren't called in by the AG, they were acting on a complaint from a defeated Liberal candidate in the riding at issue. The irony of a Liberal candidate complaining about funds being spent in a riding that may have influenced the outcome of an election is, well, humourous. Has this candidate never heard of the pork barrel? Really, it is embarassing for the Liberals on two counts - the ironic and the satiric; the latter in reference to the "leadership" of Bob Rae on this issue. The other aspect is that I heard about this on the TV news last night and this morning and am wondering how this story even has any traction in the media. Unless it was a slow news day.

From the Star RCMP to probe $50 million G8 legacy fund, after scathing auditor’s report Although the opening paragraphs and headline make it sound much worse than it is. Apparently the losing Liberal candidate has asked for a review of the funding allocation.

What is imprecise is the assumption that the 'crest of the left' is anymore important that the 'crest of the right' who also have plenty of promises of "social justice and equality." But the point about MSM was about money/profit as the maintenance of power. What sells is key, not some overriding ideological curve that goes against their best interests - especially if it affects the bottom line. If they are simply following the general trends of society itself, well, they are no worse than shoemakers and tailors following the trends of what is fashionable. You are not going to start on about how shoemakers and tailors have a left-leaning bias too are you?

Well then, let's review: Seems to me that "Alcoholism, drug abuse, gambling addiction, obesity, violent crime" could also be caused by "poverty, lack of education and overcrowding...and also boredom" wouldn't you agree? Or are you saying that "Alcoholism, drug abuse, gambling addiction, obesity, violent crime" are cultural traits intentionally passed down from one generation to the next as some sort of cultural values?

"white?" Who said anything about "white?" Oh, now I see... At first it is "non-native" and now it is "white." To some people they are not one in the same thing. But to you, I see that it is. Especially when you make a pathetic appeal. And your question is retarded Bill, considering all the links I provided you earlier. If you need to ask that question than your more ignorant than I presumed. And I don't mean "ignorant" in the sense of rude, I mean it in the sense of retarded in your lack of knowledge even after you have been easily proven wrong.

Really RNG? Here, I hope this helps: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Nationalism

All good points segnosaur, but they ignore the real point - and you have to answer the question yourself: does the CBC provide economic benefit to the Canadian economy? As for their claim that the CBC generates more economic benefit than some of the other government programs I am sure that if you did a detailed scan of some of the government's spending habits, you would agree. Start with PWGSC...

Like what? Please, do tell....

Locking striking employees out is a bargaining strategy, not some thin edge of the wedge towards privatization. Striking unions get locked out all the time since it brings pressure to bear on the union membership as a whole. It is a sound strategy and very fair.

I disagree with this characterization. Most of the MSM is just selling infotainment for profit. They represent the interests of their shareholders and sponsors and nothing else. I dont think they are instrinsically left wing, or right wing. Theyre happy wherever the money is. They sell advertising products to corporate customers - that is the very core of their business model, and the single biggest influence on how they put programming together and who they hire. I dunno, I am inclined to agree with August here, and it could be extended to include most postitions of power and influence within our society regardless of ideological stripe. The maintenance of power seems to be an ethic with our elites, by and large. In that sense, I mean the maintenance of power for it's own sake, not anything forward looking or altruistic.

Like what? Please, do tell.